.@KirkegaardEmil Thank you sir! Now that I see it, their sample was only 42. Begs for replication with larger, more representative samples.
>ratings of female facial & vocal attractiveness were positively correlated (r = .592 N = 42 p = .001) http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/The-sound-of-female-shape-a-redundant-signal-of-vocal-and-facial-attractiveness..pdf … @JayMan471 PDF
-
-
-
@JayMan471 pretty strong effect tho, so may be real. there are more studies on this stuff http://scholar.google.dk/scholar?hl=en&q=attractiveness+voice&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= … -
@KirkegaardEmil Small samples are ripe for publication bias. Need large samples (>300) and should be ethnically homogenous. -
@JayMan471 here's a prior one: r=.404, N=30, "30 female speakers, all British, aged 19–26 years (mean 21.4 years)." http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Vocal-and-visual-attractiveness-are-related-in-women.pdf … -
@JayMan471 this study has .29 for females (N=48) and .03 for men (N=62). http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Effects-of-Attractiveness-and-Maturity-of-Face-and-Voice-on-Interpersonal-Impressions.pdf … but ... -
@JayMan471 it mentions two prior studies which fund .02 and .17 for F/M. so maybe its just publication bias, or maybe bad studies.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.